Wednesday, October 14, 2009

The Obama-Fox Circus

World Net Daily notes that several Democratic magazine and newspaper advocates such as Doug Heye, a US News Democrat, and David Zurawik, a Democratic Baltimore Sun "media critic" (sic) have criticized Mr. Obama for "attacking" Fox. According to Democratic Time Magazine "media critic" (sic) James Poniewozik:

"Lately the Obama Administration has—in TIME and other outlets—been actively going on the attack against Fox News. The Administration, and Obama himself, have had run-ins with Fox before, but this time the message is different: they're characterizing the cable channel as not just a conservative outlet, but as a political organization, devoted to undermining the White House and defeating its policies."

In Roman Times the Emperors gave the Roman proletarians free bread (the first mass welfare system) and circus via the Coliseum to keep them quiet, and kept most of the spoils of conquest to themselves and their well-placed equestrian and senatorial supporters. Of course, few in the Roman establishment, the equivalent of today's Democratic Party, would question this system. A similar situation exists today.

In America there is little disagreement between Rockefeller Republicans, represented by Fox, and the Democrats. It is true Glenn Beck has attracted libertarians, but he is only one small voice of many on Fox.

Neither Fox nor Obama questioned the most corrupt wealth transfer to the ultra-rich in American history--the bailout of Wall Street last fall. Indeed, Obama amplified the inconceivably large monetary transfer that the Bush administration initiated. Bush, McCain and Obama, directly voicing Wall Street's interests, made the unfounded and nonsensical claim, supported by university economists (who are similarly motivated), that the money was necessary to stop a "depression", even though the amounts were sufficient to provide $30,000 in welfare payments to 30% of the workforce for five years. At no previous time in history has the link between the left and Wall Street been more evident, and Fox rode prominently on the left-wing Wall Street bandwagon.

Fox could have criticized Bush at the one point in the last decade where criticism would have been productive, but Fox chose to support the corrupt bailout, as did Obama.

The Progressive (in the Theodore Roosevelt-Rockefeller-Bush sense) Republicans and the Democrats represent the same interests. Fox is largely the mouthpiece of the Roosevelt-Rockefeller-Bush Republicans, and with the exception of Beck DOES NOT represent mainstream Americans, except for a few who work on Wall Street.

The interests whom Fox and Obama both represent need to provide a circus. By making voters think that there is a Republican-Obama debate, they will be distracted from their main concerns: the destruction of future economic opportunity and the impoverishment of their children; inflation and the weakening of the dollar; the Fed's transfer of productive Americans' wealth to the wealthy; increasingly aggressive socialist control of people's education and lifestyles; and government enforced secular humanism. What better method of manipulation than a "good cop/bad cop" routine?

The Obama-Fox debate is entertaining for those who choose to watch Republicrat news outlets like Fox. But see it for what it is: A circus.

Google Custom Search

Pages

Mitchell Langbert

About Me

I have researched and written about employee benefit issues and in my previous life was a corporate benefits administrator. I am currently associate professor of business at Brooklyn College. I hold a Ph.D. from the Columbia University Graduate School of Business, an MBA from UCLA and an AB from Sarah Lawrence College. I am working on a project involving public policy. I blog on academic and political topics.